 |
||
|
||
|
||
Why is the media so mealy-mouthed when it comes to defending the
BJP against its mean and ruthless detractors? Does the media -
especially the English language media - think it is upholding
secularism by telling the most blatant lies about the BJP? The
reference is two instances of alleged rape reported, one from a
village in Madhya Pradesh and another from a village in Haryana.
It from Jhabua in Madhya Pradesh, that a group of people
attacked a Christian hostel and raped, three nuns and molested
one.
The allegation was that the two dozen criminals who indulged in
this act were supporters of or were instigated by either the
VHP, the RSS or the BJP. Few bothered to investigate.
Now it turns out that of the two dozen men who attacked the nuns
half of them were themselves Christians! The others were Bhil
tribesmen. Considering that Christian missionaries do not
concede that tribes people are Hindus what are we to make of the
initial insinuation that the rape incident was at the
instigation of the VHP?
It took the Observer to publish a report from S Gurumurthy
setting the record straight. But let it be on record that
Gurumurthy is closely associated with the RSS.
Gurumurthy's article appeared in the Observer on 4 November.
Soon thereafter another report appeared - this one in the
Hindustan Times - that two nuns were assaulted in a Haryana
village called Jhajjar. The Hindustan Times published the report
(11 November) under the heading: "Jhabua 're-renacted' in
Jhajjar: Two Nuns brutally assaulted by a Violent Mob."
Archbishop of Delhi, the Rev Alail de Lastic was quoted as
saying that attacking "hapless nuns working in remote areas of
the country' would spell 'disaster' for the unity of the
country.
Again, no paper bothered to make its own inquiries. But on 13
November two reporters, Shelley Vishwajeet and C R Rathee
writing in The Observer again, said that “an on-the-spot
investigation The Observer of Business and Politics reveals that
no nuns were even physically touched, leave alone molested." The
report said: “An argument following the involvement of nuns in
local petty politics has been sought to be painted as atrocities
against the Christian community by the BJP-RSS combine' Also,
said the report, Kheri Khummar village, where the incident took
place, is no isolated place but is an extension of the Jhajjar
town "and the rented house of the nuns is situated barely 2 kms
from the residence of Deputy Commissioner Arun Kumar." The
question arises: Is there a sustained campaign in the English
language press to damn the VHP-RSS-BJP? To what end? Have facts
got to be twisted to suit a particular line of thinking? Is
this journalism?
To continue with the controversy over what Press Council of
India chairman Justice Sawant is supposed to have said in the
matter of appointment of journalists under the contract system,
the Indian Journalists Union (IJU) has demanded a complete and
comprehensive ban on the system 'in all its forms'.
According to a report in the Deccan Herald, in a 440-page
memorandum presented before the Wage Board. the IJU said that by
"depriving the working journalists of job security and statutory
benefits like gratuity and Provident Fund, the system not only
created a class of mercenary pen-pushers to serve the vested
interests of newspaper owners and help them usurp freedom of the
press, but also sought to scuttle the Wage Board Award".
This is a serious charge that needs to be gone into in depth.
Are journalists hired on contract eligible for Provident Fund?
How can that be? If a journalist is sacked at the end of the
contract period or if his contract is not to be renewed, where
does the question of Provident Fund come in?
Again, knowing fully well that if he displeases the powers that
be, he will be out on the streets, which journalist will stick
his neck out to write a story that will go against the interests
of the newspaper proprietor?
By opting for the contract system of hire-and-fire, what
newspaper owners are doing is to effectively snuff out all
honest journalism and turn reporters into ventriloquists'
dummies.
It is this, obviously that Justice Sawant is worried about. For
the Commonwealth Press Union, therefore to say that Justice
Sawant's remarks are a threat to press freedom is showing rank
ignorance. Justice Sawant is to be warmly congratulated, and
fully supported, in his mission to preserve the freedom of the
press. The International Press Institute, too, seems to have
been badly informed for it to urge the Press Council of India
“to refrain from interfering in matters that should be
determined by the market and the law of the land." Justice
Sawant's ripostes both correct and apt. "We have not reached a
stage" he said in reply, "where we have to learn the law of the
land and the mandate of the Press Council Act from others."
There can be no doubt whatsoever that the Contract System is
intended to axe the freedom of the press and permit newspaper
owners to run their press in a manner that suits their needs
under the guise of market forces.
Incidentally, the IJU has demanded a five-fold increase in the
basic pay-scales of working journalists besides a four-day week
for journalists who have to work long hours on computers. Also
the IJU wants full neutralisation of the rise in the cost of
living through dearness allowance as well as house rent
allowance ranging between 30 and 75 per cent of the basic pay
for different classes of newspapers and cities.
According to the UNI report in the Deccan Herald (29 October)
other major demands of the IJU include the increase of the
retirement age to 65 years and grant of pension ranging from 75
and 50 per cent of the emoluments last drawn, local conveyance
allowance, modernisation allowance, medical allowance, medi-
claim insurance cover for all working journalists and, their
families, maternity allowance equivalent to one month's basic
salary for women journalists, outfit allowance, self-education
allowances, children allowance, risk allowance, remote and
difficult areas allowance, desk allowance, refreshment allowance
and house-building advance up to Rs 10 lakhs, on easy terms. It
would be a very generous newspaper proprietor who would concede
any of these.
Commenting on the prevalent controversy Ajit Bhattacharjea,
Director of the Press Institute of India, New Delhi, said in an
article in The Hindu (6 November) that "the rift between
organisations of newspaper owners and the Press Council of India
has revived basic questions concerning the environment in which
the press can perform its functions freely." Mr Bhattacharjea
made the following points:
* The cult of middle-class consumerism has encouraged the growth
of numerous small and middle-range, papers, most of them run by
owner-editors with no professional training or values. This has
often led to competition in Exaggerating and even fictionalising
events to increase circulation and cater to sectional interests.
* Rural areas in which the bulk of our people live are virtually
ignored by most papers (since) covering them involves travel and
expense. But this is not favoured by newspaper managements
because the poor offer no incentive to advertisers.
* Many studies have noted the lop-sided coverage of Indian
newspapers. Bhattacharjea quoted a report on voluntary work in
Madhya Pradesh which found that the media is failing to play its
social role. Among other things the report said that
"professional media managers seem to have lost a considerable
part of their power to owner proprietors who are much more
interested in financial profitability and political
manipulation."
Added Bhattacharjea: “Our major newspapers have all the
resources and talent required to draw attention to the living
conditions of the bulk of the people and help empower them,
(which is the function of the free press in a democracy.
If they prefer to cater primarily to the needs and tastes of the
small, affluent consumerist segment, they invite suggestions for
alternative structures, as advocated by both the Press
Commissions.”
One has only to study newspaper supplements like the published
by the The Times of India Group to appreciate Bhattacharjea's
comments.
|
||
|
||
|
||